Skip to main content

About your Search

20130216
20130224
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
. they have been playing by the rules. after that, set of a process where you enable google to come in and have a legal pathway to do it. that is something we have to embrace. there are some nuances moving forward. you have got to find a way to say people in line right now have first preference. then make it legally possible to move forward. >> twitter question -- do you believe that citizens united, the court case, has been good for america? >> it does not matter what i think, i am not in the supreme court. >> it affects you politically. >> what of the big mistakes is, the law in wisconsin predated the court decision in terms of having no limits on campaign contributions. it did not impact one way or the other. >> do you think the impact of unlimited money has been good or bad for the body politic? >> more transparency is good. campaign-finance reform, everybody thinks they have a great solution. it is like squeezing a water balloon. the federal system akin to the presidential election is great, it was publicly financed and transparent. howard dean was the first one to break it. th
was at google, and every time i would interact with anyone externally, the one question they would ask me, search is wonderful, it is great to be able to find everything, how is anyone going to make any money from this? now that seems almost absurd, because search is the giant moneymaker online. that said, whenever you see consumers adopting a technology platform, a particular application like search with this much volume, you know that advertisers will want to participate. there's usually a way where you can introduce advertising such that it is not intrusive, that it adds value, that enhances the experience. that's what we need to work on. >> we can look back and see how that was done with search. everybody gets to play monday morning quarterback and feel smart about it. can you tell yet what some of the shifts will be in mobile that will allow mobile to duplicate the success of search as a money maker? it has to make money or else at some point innovation will grind to a halt. >> well, i think people already are. for example, the application stores, a lot of people sell applications. i
rapidly. host: "the washington post "said it is easy to see how a company such as google can build new grain assistance that mimics the activity of the human brain. on twitter, we have a viewer who last -- guest: i think it's a little hard to predict where this is going. i think we need ethical, legal, social oversight at every stage. i think we need to also avoid over promising, if these are considered desirable. but certainly, if any of those are to happen, then there will be projects like this to get us close enough so that we can do this in a safe and productive manner. host: can you expect--- can you expand on the ethical oversight on these matters? guest: we have seen there is a need to think of all the different ways, the risks and benefits of how this can go right and wrong and anticipate those years and events and a time when that does not seem urgent. we have such conversations going on already and hope to have more as this project to build up. host: independent line. good morning. curious whether or not there has been a base theorem applied to try to estimate the pretest pro
spice? >> yeah. >> we have this thing called google. i saw an image today of a secret drone base that maybe is flying drones into yes, ma'am minute. i know you want to comment than too. we can get images from virtually any place on the planet. >> back to my point you remember the slice that has to be slole season smaller than it used to be. i'm old enough to remember when we were doing image frs space it was so complicated and so expensive that only two nations could do it and only one could do it really well. now if i'm tired and can't sleep tonight and go home. i can go downstairs and pull up imagery of north korea and watch the missile being stacked there and to a degree of resolution that allows me to tell you how far away they might be. >> that used to be annual owned by you? >> yeah. i'm lookth ging at the audience, there are some old enough to remember the first call four. if you remember general puts a whole corp out here out beyond a ravine and the day before the land war started where are these guys. there is nothing in front of this corp. there is no opposing force. i
, i was at google, and every time i would interact with anyone externally, the one question they would ask me, search is wonderful, it is great to be able to find everything, how is anyone going to make any money from this? now that seems almost absurd, because search is the giant moneymaker online. that said, whenever you see consumers adopting a technology platform, a particular application like search with this much volume, you know that advertisers will want to participate. there's usually a way where you can introduce advertising such that it is not intrusive, that it adds value, that enhances the experience. that's what we need to work on. >> we can look back and see how that was done with search. everybody gets to play monday morning quarterback and feel smart about it. can you tell yet what some of the shifts will be in mobile that will allow mobile to duplicate the success of search as a money maker? it has to make money or else at some point innovation will grind to a halt. >> well, i think people already are. for example, the application stores, a lot of people sell applicat
onstage, and only he could have done it. google it.- i want to integrate some responses, but i had some other things i wanted to talk about. i would want to say something about where we go from here. from a liberty point of view now?re we right there has been for a least since about 1995 and because of senator mcconnell, a strategy of just saying no to campaign finance regulation, restrictions. that has worked remarkably well. it is true mccain-feingold passed, but it resulted in is a soft money banned pit it has had a remarkable effect, but we have to ask, why is it that just say no had a remarkable effect? part of a is is that it fits pretty well with the first amendment. it has embodied the notion of just saying no to congress and saying consistently across the board, that is our position. it has been successful, as i mentioned earlier in my comments. giving in a little bit of leaves to a set of problems. what i want to ask is, is that the future? is that the way to go? what remains to be done? what kind of restrictions are there still on speech? i want to start with incremental thin
with apple and google in terms of the operating system. we have a strong partnership with facebook. we're able to work with some of these players in order to bolster our user experiences. >> is that diecast? you talk about this new graph, the interest graph. is that the kind of technology that will become key to distribution? >> with the web becoming so vast, there is so much context and so much social context, and now there is so much location context, how do you pull all that together? your personalization comes in to make sense of the content. it is the internet ordered for you. it brings yahoo! back to its roots. you cannot just categorize anymore. a feed of information that is ordered for you. it is also available on your mobile phone. >> some of those technologies remain -- there is competition in the browser world, in the mobile hardware world, and in the operating system world. what about social? >> facebook provides an amazing platform. now what happens with social is what you do with it. it will be the predominant platform. what happens in social is what you do with it. it is
in the world today: apple, cardinal health, amazon, google, the cleveland clinic, ibm, and right here in northwest ohio, marathon. these companies strive for change every day and the state of ohio must do it as well. we cannot rest on our laurels. these companies don't fear big ideas. we must not fear big ideas. we must embrace them. oh, yeah, let's debate them. and that's the fun part of being in the government, debate them without the personal attack, debate them on the merits, but embrace them, because at the end of the day, big ideas, it will renew us, it will restore our youth, it will give us excitement. we will have a sprint in our step because big ideas renew people. the only thing that can stop us, ladies and gentlemen, is the fear of change, the fear of big ideas. let's not go there. we're starting to hit on all cylinders. our program of innovation and common sense policies, we believe, does create success. just like the first budget helped us to dig out of the hole and set the stage for growth, this allows us to shift into higher gear. our budget is designed to come togethe
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)